Pastir v. Bielski
Decision Date | 17 January 1978 |
Citation | 384 A.2d 367,174 Conn. 193 |
Parties | Stephanie PASTIR et al. v. Frank BIELSKI, Administrator, Estate of Helen Bielski. |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Edward R. Carley, Bridgeport, for appellant (defendant).
Vincent P. Adley, Bridgeport, for appellees (plaintiffs).
Before HOUSE, C. J., and LOISELLE, BOGDANSKI, LONGO and SPEZIALE, JJ.
The plaintiffs, heirs-at-law of Helen Bielski, deceased, appealed to the Superior Court from the admission of the decedent's will to probate. They claimed that the testatrix "lacked sufficient testamentary capacity to make and execute a (w)ill" and that the will was the product of undue influence exerted upon the testatrix by the defendant, Frank Bielski. The trial court found the will to be invalid and, from the judgment rendered, the defendant, proponent of the will, appealed to this court.
In its finding, the trial court concluded that "(t)he testatrix did not possess the requisite testamentary capacity to execute . . . (the) will" and that "(t)he proponent of the will failed to sustain his burden of proof." In his assignments of error, the defendant attacked the court's finding but failed to brief those assignments of error. Assignments of error not briefed are considered abandoned. Pappas v. Pappas, 164 Conn. 242, 243, 320 A.2d 809.
" D'Agostino v. Amarante, 172 Conn. 529, 530-31, 375 A.2d 1013.
The record clearly reveals that the defendant, proponent of the will, failed to sustain his burden of proof as to the statutory issues of execution and testamentary capacity. Since...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gunther v. Dubno
...of equal protection. The plaintiffs have not briefed that issue on appeal and it is thus considered abandoned. See Pastir v. Bielski, 174 Conn. 193, 384 A.2d 367 (1978).13 The due process clauses of the United States constitution, § 1 of the fourteenth amendment, and of the Connecticut cons......
-
Silverstein v. Silverstein, No. CV 04-0083699 S (CT 2/24/2005), CV 04-0083699 S
...in the Probate Court, and in the Superior Court, on appeal, the statutory predicate for the court's order. Pastir v. Bielski, 174 Conn. 193, 194, 384 A.2d 367 (1978); D'Agostino v. Amarante, 172 Conn. 529, 530-31, 375 A.2d 1013 (1977); Crane v. Manchester, 143 Conn. 498, 501, 123 A.2d 752 (......
-
Stanton v. Grigley
...in question. The burden of proof in disputes over testamentary capacity is on the party claiming under the will. Pastir v. Bielski, 174 Conn. 193, 194, 384 A.2d 367 (1978); Wheat v. Wheat, 156 Conn. 575, 578, 244 A.2d 359 (1968); Comstock v. Hadlyme, 8 Conn. 254, 260-61 (1830). While there ......
-
Milford Emp. Ass'n v. City of Milford
...court on this issue was assigned as error, it has not been briefed before us and is, therefore, deemed abandoned. Pastir v. Bielski, 174 Conn. 193, 384 A.2d 367 (1978); Maltbie, Conn.App.Proc. § 327.5 The plaintiffs made a substantial attack on the referee's 404 paragraph finding. For reaso......